i know i said i didn't like him before but he's just so natural a scorer and already has so many offensive moves i'd find it really hard to pass on him. he'd be a perfect 6th man, filling it up off the bench.

i know i said i didn't like him before but he's just so natural a scorer and already has so many offensive moves i'd find it really hard to pass on him. he'd be a perfect 6th man, filling it up off the bench.

I think I want to move away from ball dominant scoring guards who lack high level passing skills. Personal choice.

But if you want to draft a guy who can put the ball in the bucket, Warren is a pretty good option.

All about situation. Personally think that there wasn't a best place DD could have went to other than Toronto. Him being drafted by Toronto was the best thing in his career. Don't get me wrong he still would of been good just cause of his work ethic.

K.J. McDaniels: The Clemson forward showed one of the reasons why he was able to register 1.4 steals and 3.3 blocks per 40 minutes as a small forward last season as he measured with a 6-11 ľ wingspan. McDaniels' wingspan measured 1 ĺ inches longer than it did in 2013, when he measured 6-6 with a 6-9 Ĺ wingspan at LeBron James Camp. McDaniels' “new-found” length is important, as it should allow him to defend small forwards comfortably, despite standing just 6-6 in shoes and weighing 196 pounds. McDaniels' build is similar to that of Gerald Green (6'6 without shoes, 192 pounds, 6'9 ĺ wingspan) or Josh Childress (6'5 ĺ without shoes, 196 pounds, 6'11 wingspan).

Why do you think Hood is very one dimensional? He is a very good shooter and playmaker out of the PnR, can handle and run the offense from the SF position. I thought he out played Parker at Duke.

GR3 and Nik comparison is poor because they have completely different skills and roles in the team. GR3 is not going to be an elite shooter or a good ball handler/playmaker/PnR/DHO guy like Stauskas. He is going to be a cutter and spot up shooter who focuses on defense.

Bachynski is a late second round pick, who if he turns into a solid end of bench guy I would be super happy. Not everyone is going to be a superstar, especially at those really late picks.

It wasn't the best Duke team so I could be holding him to an impossible standard. That being said, he faded to the corner way too much for my liking. By the end of the season it felt like all he could do was wait in the corner to take jumpers. Also, very little off the ball motion. It is assumed that Hood played the 3 because Parker isn't that good on defense (It's possible that Parker is actually a 4, and his measurements at the combine make that a possibility), but I wasn't terribly impressed on that end of the court either. Could it just be a weak supporting cast? It's not like he had a legit 5 to guide his player to...

No doubt GR3 and Stauskas have significantly different games, my point is that they were given equal opportunity to be the man, and Stauskas shined brightly with opportunity while GR3,for all the tools he has, hasn't put it all together. He has a solid base of tools for sure, but right now he's a really athletic player, with an excellent shot who can't consistently put together solid games back-to-back. I should probably explain what I mean; to me the best player on the court isn't necessarily the guy who scores the most, but the player whose play seems to motivate the players around him. Sometimes you could see that motivation behind GR3's game, you could always see that intent behind Stauskas'. I know it's not a tangible explanation but that's what I got...

Of course not everyone is going to be a star. But should the goal of a deep 2nd round pick be to go safe, or try for a very high risk-high return player? After pick 50 you might as well gamble. There will be other NCAA senior free agents available after the draft. Might as well try to find the next Isaiah Thomas (the Sac player, not the legend), instead of a Robert Sacre. Furthermore, with a good scouting staff you can find a legit end of bench big from Europe, Asia, South America, or a minor league for league minimum. That's a grown man with pro experience, why use the draft for a similar player with less experience so deep in the draft? Will I get upset if they draft Bachynski? No, I just don't agree with that type of scouting philosophy.

Also, I'm not for drafting a Canadian because they're Canadian. I've said it before, but if the Raps really want to be Canada's team they need to take advantage of the lawlessness of the CIS. It's a huge pool of players that other teams do not have the ability to scout. Every year the CIS sends a handful of kids to leagues around the world. What if the best CIS prospects (no matter their nationality) ended up on Rap summer league teams? That would be big. That would create motivation for every kid playing CIS -- to know that someone is potentially watching them.

As for drafting Canadians, the Raps should only draft them if they are the best player available at the pick. They get to see a lot of these kids at National camps because either games are played in Toronto, or training is done at the ACC. If they think, for instance, Melvin Ejim is worth buying a 2nd round pick for, THAT would get me excited. THAT would tell me that the Raps wanted a player, made a move to get him, and his being Canadian only mattered because it allowed them to scout his game more thoroughly than if he wasn't.

No doubt GR3 and Stauskas have significantly different games, my point is that they were given equal opportunity to be the man, and Stauskas shined brightly with opportunity while GR3,for all the tools he has, hasn't put it all together. He has a solid base of tools for sure, but right now he's a really athletic player, with an excellent shot who can't consistently put together solid games back-to-back. I should probably explain what I mean; to me the best player on the court isn't necessarily the guy who scores the most, but the player whose play seems to motivate the players around him. Sometimes you could see that motivation behind GR3's game, you could always see that intent behind Stauskas'. I know it's not a tangible explanation but that's what I got...

Of course not everyone is going to be a star. But should the goal of a deep 2nd round pick be to go safe, or try for a very high risk-high return player? After pick 50 you might as well gamble. There will be other NCAA senior free agents available after the draft. Might as well try to find the next Isaiah Thomas (the Sac player, not the legend), instead of a Robert Sacre.

Bold 1: I completely understand where you are coming from. Though for that whole paragraph I don't really know what you are arguing.....I'm a huge Nik Stauskas fan, and think he is going to be one of the better players in this draft, not only for his skills but he LED that Michigan team like you said. Him being on the floor and playing well made everyone else better. Same with his teammate, LaVert (who I think will be a good pro)

2: Well I think getting a safe, role player out of your second rounders is a better way to build a team. Just think how many second rounders over the last few years that have been absolutely nothing for us...and then we have had to turn to over-paying Aaron Gray in FA to get a backup C. Or we could just draft a defense first, low upside guy and pay him 800k to be a better version of that. Then say if you have 2-3 guys that you drafted late have value, you can organize trades easier if you have pieces at the end of the bench that aren't Buycks. Not so much need superstars, but need to get some people with value.

white men can't jump wrote:

That's also why I'm not big on Early. He just doesn't even try to pass the ball.

Same. I want high-IQ team players only, and

TSF wrote:

A poor man's rashard lewis isn't a turn-off to me. A poor man of a guy who averaged around 20 points, 5.5 Rbs, 2 assists and 1 steal in his prime isn't bad value.

Basically my thinking. Though I think he will be a better passer and a poorer rebounder. Which is fine.

Bold 1: I completely understand where you are coming from. Though for that whole paragraph I don't really know what you are arguing.....I'm a huge Nik Stauskas fan, and think he is going to be one of the better players in this draft, not only for his skills but he LED that Michigan team like you said. Him being on the floor and playing well made everyone else better. Same with his teammate, LaVert (who I think will be a good pro)

2: Well I think getting a safe, role player out of your second rounders is a better way to build a team. Just think how many second rounders over the last few years that have been absolutely nothing for us...and then we have had to turn to over-paying Aaron Gray in FA to get a backup C. Or we could just draft a defense first, low upside guy and pay him 800k to be a better version of that. Then say if you have 2-3 guys that you drafted late have value, you can organize trades easier if you have pieces at the end of the bench that aren't Buycks. Not so much need superstars, but need to get some people with value.

On point 1:

Not really arguing. I just felt like, after reflecting on your response, my earlier post wasn't clear enough. I'm just saying that you can compare the two, since they were on the same team, with equal opportunity in a tangential way. We agree they have very different games. It's the leadership qualities (or lack of) that concerns me with GR3. If I'm not being clear no worries, it's not like this is a face-to-face debate...

On point 2:

I agree with where you are coming from, accumulating value ETAL. You could also do a Euro-stash for similar effect I guess. In normal circumstances I would be on your side, but that late in the second round, with multiple second round picks gambling with the late second rounder becomes a sound strategy. If the Raps bought into the late 2nd round, then making a conservative pick makes sense -- they would literally be buying into a position to make such a move. However, this pick was a trade throw in that was never meant to become any player of consequence. For me, these are the exact type of picks that should be used on high potential candidates. More importantly, opportunities like this don't occur as much as they used to (unless you're the Sixers).

Daniels is too short to be a SF. His standing reach is in the SG range and he won't be able to contest people who decide to shoot over him.

I think Stauskas becomes the best player in this draft not named Wiggins, Embiid or Exum. I would do a lot to move up to grab him.

I think I've narrowed down the list of players I would draft to these guys.

PG: Ennis/Payton
SG: Stauskas
SF: Hood, GR3
PF:
C: Bachynski

I'm a huge fan of Stauskas but not sure I would go that far. I would however be stoked if we traded up to grab him. Everyone seems to only see his elite shooting, but he's also an excellent distributor/playmaker with decent handles.

For our 20 pick Ennis would be a steal if he actually drops that far, which many mocks are showing to be the case. If not Ennis I'm hoping we get a strong defender either at the pg or sf to further establish the raps defensive identity, Given the quotes from their scouts it sounds like this is what the raps are thinking as well.

NBA.com Draft Overview : Toronto

Draft Overview
Areas of Strength
Team defense and bench play. The Raptors didnít have one standout defender, but under coach Dwane Casey, they were a top-10 defense. And if they can bring back both Greivis Vasquez and Patrick Patterson, they will once again have one of the best benches in the league. Toronto was at its best when those guys played.

Needs Work
As Joe Johnson beat them up in the paint throughout their seven-game, first-round series, it became clear that the Raptors need size on the wing. They donít have anybody to guard guys like Johnson, LeBron James, Paul George or Carmelo Anthony one-on-one.

Two Stats That Matter
1 -- The Raptors were the only Eastern Conference team that ranked in the top 10 in both offensive and defensive efficiency.

14.9 -- Points per 100 possessions that the Raptors outscored their opponents by in 490 minutes with point guards Kyle Lowry and Greivis Vasquez on the floor together.

The Way To Go
NBA.com's Draft expert, Scott Howard-Cooper, offers up his suggestions:
The Raptors could look power forward at No. 20 to find someone to challenge Amir Johnson, but likely donít find many options unless Adreian Payne or Clint Capela have slight tumbles. Point guard, though, could quickly become a pressing need, with Kyle Lowry (unrestricted) and Greivis Vasquez (restricted) both about to hit free agency. At the very least, Toronto may want protection and would be picking right as a run of point guards likely begins: Zach LaVine, if the Raptors believe he is more distributor than shooting guard, Vasilije Micic, Elfrid Payton, Shabazz Napier, Deonte Burton, with potential looks at several others projected more for early in the second round. But the marketing dream outcome of Tyler Ennis, from suburban Toronto, still being available is a major longshot.

For those of you wanting a cis player to actually be on an nba team. i got one. we were kinda tight when he was still in highschool like 2 years ago. His name is Javon Masters and he just won rookie of the year of the cis and aus. He averaged like 30 points 4 assists and 4 rebounds per game. Hes from kitchener and hes just dityy. Check him out he plays for the university of New brunswick. Cant believe he made it this far still a freshman